A majority of the group made clear that they do not favor the decision making that takes 

 place under the Endangered Species Act, preferring instead the more open, public review 

 approach used by the current Council. Development of a dispute resolution process of some 

 type was also strongly supported, with discussions focusing on the type of process that would be 

 most effective. One model that received a considerable amount of discussion was the approach 

 used in the Mid-Columbia FERC proceedings. No agreement was reached on a process. 



There was a strong feeling in the group that the decision making body needed to have 

 control of the funds and to be accountable for their expenditure and that to date there has been 

 no accountability. The group endorsed developing a yearly performance audit to assess results. 



Most of the group appeared to support continued use of independent scientific review, 

 although there was little discussion about the subject directly. Some raised concerns over too 

 strong a reliance on science in answering some questions; others on how to develop a dispute 

 resolution process for scienufic questions. There was no agreement on these issues. 



24 



